• Announcements

    • khawk

      Download the Game Design and Indie Game Marketing Freebook   07/19/17

      GameDev.net and CRC Press have teamed up to bring a free ebook of content curated from top titles published by CRC Press. The freebook, Practices of Game Design & Indie Game Marketing, includes chapters from The Art of Game Design: A Book of Lenses, A Practical Guide to Indie Game Marketing, and An Architectural Approach to Level Design. The GameDev.net FreeBook is relevant to game designers, developers, and those interested in learning more about the challenges in game development. We know game development can be a tough discipline and business, so we picked several chapters from CRC Press titles that we thought would be of interest to you, the GameDev.net audience, in your journey to design, develop, and market your next game. The free ebook is available through CRC Press by clicking here. The Curated Books The Art of Game Design: A Book of Lenses, Second Edition, by Jesse Schell Presents 100+ sets of questions, or different lenses, for viewing a game’s design, encompassing diverse fields such as psychology, architecture, music, film, software engineering, theme park design, mathematics, anthropology, and more. Written by one of the world's top game designers, this book describes the deepest and most fundamental principles of game design, demonstrating how tactics used in board, card, and athletic games also work in video games. It provides practical instruction on creating world-class games that will be played again and again. View it here. A Practical Guide to Indie Game Marketing, by Joel Dreskin Marketing is an essential but too frequently overlooked or minimized component of the release plan for indie games. A Practical Guide to Indie Game Marketing provides you with the tools needed to build visibility and sell your indie games. With special focus on those developers with small budgets and limited staff and resources, this book is packed with tangible recommendations and techniques that you can put to use immediately. As a seasoned professional of the indie game arena, author Joel Dreskin gives you insight into practical, real-world experiences of marketing numerous successful games and also provides stories of the failures. View it here. An Architectural Approach to Level Design This is one of the first books to integrate architectural and spatial design theory with the field of level design. The book presents architectural techniques and theories for level designers to use in their own work. It connects architecture and level design in different ways that address the practical elements of how designers construct space and the experiential elements of how and why humans interact with this space. Throughout the text, readers learn skills for spatial layout, evoking emotion through gamespaces, and creating better levels through architectural theory. View it here. Learn more and download the ebook by clicking here. Did you know? GameDev.net and CRC Press also recently teamed up to bring GDNet+ Members up to a 20% discount on all CRC Press books. Learn more about this and other benefits here.

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Landfish

Cheese?

81 posts in this topic

Original AP here (not the other guy - maybe I should register if I''m gonna keep this up).

No, I don''t know that I play games to learn rules and figure out how to beat them - I could go to law school if that''s what I was about. I certainly don''t play games for the ''plot''. They''re usually lame in CRPGs compared to what you can find in film, literature or face-to-face RPGs.


What I look for in a computer game is immersion. Immersion is an easy word to use but tough to define and the subjective factors that contribute to the phenomenon for any given player vary. For me what contribute the most to immersion is the sense of being part of a consistant and unpredictable event - the game - that places me in a role and world I find believable. The more consistant (reliable behaviors and rules) and unpredictable (not scripted or repetative) the world is the more believable my role and the world become to me. I don''t care whether it''s Red Baron 3D or King of Dragon Pass, Alpha Centauri or Daggerfall. I''m there, in the zone.

Now, the moment I find myself dealing with predictable, shallow, cardboard cookiecutter NPCs, events and plots like you find in typical fantasy adventure/CRPGs I start yawning. Even good games like Torment or Fallout eventually had me thinking that I could be reading a better book or a nice graphic novel - I''d still get a good story and not have to futz about with inventories or spending time foozle bashing for foozle treasures. I don''t want to play /your/ adventure. I want you to make it possible for me to discover an adventure of my own. Um. Please?

I liked the other idea about the engine being two steps ahead and having this orbit a loose skeleton plot, perhaps a double-jointed skeleton at that.
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
quote:
Original post by dwarfsoft

This is excellent and definitely something that I wish to get in on. Plot, hmmm.... I still beleive that you require a reasonably sound plot, no matter the characterization involved, however... I am 100% in agreement that strong characterization is needed to further a plot. I never really stepped back and said "They don''t do that, but they should". The reason that I say that plot is required is because without it, you have a great excuse for the player to criticise your game. They may like a little interaction, but they will on the whole diss your game. Nuff said




Characterization might have a hidden strength, though. I''m not saying get rid of plot, but I am saying that with strong characters your player(s) might infer more substance and content than you''ve actually provided. It might even drive them to think about the character motives, the nature of the game world, it''s history, etc... all without actually experiencing it.

The best example I can think of was the Orz, a race from Star Control 2. You came away from the game (and will find fan pages) wondering *what in the hell* they were. They had the most bizarre form of speech, communicating through approximate metaphors. They talked about *more parties in the middle* and *happy times* incessantly. They appeared funny and nonsensical, yet they were __DEADLY__. In fact, as a plot event where they caused an entire race to vanish, you found yourself wondering (because you''d gotten to know them enough) *what the hell they did* with the missing race.

So strong characterization and a somewhat weaker plot __MAY__ allow a more non-linear methods of exploring the game, while still giving you strong authorial over the user''s experience. This is because the mind fills in the blanks that a less linear plot can not.


--------------------
Just waiting for the mothership...
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think there''s probably alot of other game designers who have asked these same questions about gameplay, depth, story, and interaction. While I do not propose that all avenues have been expored, I think that there is relatively little room for improvement in the single player expirence. A field where I see great potential for true interaction with the story is in Massively Multiplayer(MMP) Games. Players actually create the stories and quests themselves, form their own true friends and enemies, and instigate their own quests with partys of real people. I think single player games will be hard pressed to match the level of interaction and customization that massively multi player games provide. Additionally there isn''t much history to MMP Games and the field is still wide open for innovation.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ironside-

While Massively Multiplayer Graphical Games are a fairly new and exciting development, Massively Multiplayer Games have been around almost as long as computer gaming itself, in the form of MUDs. I don''t mention this to split hairs or anything, but if single-player gaming is a dead art, then what''s so special about MMG''s? Should I postulate from what you''ve said that MMG''s will be out of fashion in five years or so, since it took roughly that length of time for computer gaming to evolve that form? And after that, will we need virtual reality for something new to do? Balderdash!

Single-player gaming is here to stay, as long as we are still sitting in front of a terminal and pushing buttons. Game designers are still finding ways to innovate w/ current technology, and every boost in technology finds its way into new game designs. When technology''s levelled out, I predict you''ll see a slight dip in sales, but single player games will continue to innovate in terms of content and new forms of interaction. Just because Blizzard & Id clones are dominating the current market does not mean that innovative games do not exist and will not continue well into the future.

Look at movies. At first, "moving pictures" were all the rage, whether it was a moving picture of a train, a field, a horse, whatever. The novelty was the thing. Then there was a period where the quality of the motion improved, and a slight jump in the quality of the content. Soundtracks were added and you had Buster Keaton and Charlie Chaplain. The technology plateaued for awhile, then the tech whizzes added color, and there was a second period of novelty where movie-goers were content w. just about any moving picture, so long as it was colored. The novelty of this wore off quickly, and you can imagine that people probably were nay-saying Hollywood at the time. And we all now what followed shortly after- What many refer to as the Golden Age of Film. Now, I do not personally care for most of the movies that came out during this period. On the other hand, Fight Club, Pulp Fiction, and The Matrix are among some of my favorites. The first, because it has such an original dramatic structure, the second for partially the same reason, partially for its characters, and partially because I love the word "motherf*cker" and only the last impressed me w/ its special effects.

Now, there''s no unwritten law that video games will follow a similar trajectory, but its very likely the case that they will. So from this we can abstract that more than likely

  1. The novelty of "interactive entertainment" will wear off (or already has).
  2. The gaming industry will plateau along w/ the related technologies. (hasn''t yet)
  3. Game designers will start looking for new modes of interaction, content & overall game structure.
  4. This process will not slow down any time in the near future.
  5. Despite the technological plateau, new developments on the technical front will not grind to a halt any time soon, either.


Just my. . .ah forget it
I apologize in advance to your retinas.

If you see the Buddha on the road, Kill Him. -apocryphal
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Y''know, Anonymous Poster. It''s very odd that you mentioned Fight Club there...

Y''see the rant you just gave was the VERY SAME one that I traditionally make. The analogy to film as an example of how games will evolve, your past posts where you''ve stolen the words out of my mouth... I''m beginning to think that we might be the same person. Have you ever worked a night job as a projectionist, or a banquet waiter?
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Wav, I agree that deep representation of characters can add to immersion and non-linearity. I remember when I saw American Beauty I was drawing lines in between different events, and I was thinking it was likely that the writers hadn''t exactly planned. It''s due to the deep characters, and great acting also.


"""" "'Nazrix is cool' -- Nazrix" --Darkmage --Godfree"-Nazrix" -- runemaster --and now dwarfsoft" -- dwarfsoft --pouya" -- Nazrix

""You see... I'm not crazy... you see?!? Nazrix believes me!" --Wavinator

Need help? Well, go FAQ yourself.
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Every now and then an industry or technology expirences a paradigm shift. Intel for example started off primairly as a memory manufacturing company, when japaneese competators under cut intels memory prices, Intel had to re-invent it self in order to remain viable. As for the movie example. When movies first started having audio many silent film stars said that it was just a fad. Few silent film stars were able to make the transition to the new type of media and many began a downward spirial that ended there carieers (sp?).

From my perspective, i rarely buy a game unless it has a mulitplayer aspect, with some exceptions being (fallout, planescape torment etc.) I never even finished the single player side of Diablo. The immursiveness and reality of interacting with a real person in a fictional world is just so much more intoxicating then the single player story.

It''s like the difference between choose your own adventure books and AD&D.

I personally believe that the massively multiplayer tecnology shift presents a potential paradigm shift in how games are made and played. True it is an immature field and singleplayer games are an established tecnology with lots of history, thus some of the finer single player titles today could make some MMP''s look rudimentary and Kludgy. Even so the levels of interaction and reality in MMP''s are basic building blocks for these games, where they are a tecnical marvle and huge challenge for single player games. This alone presents what I would consider a potential paradigm shift.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
quote:
Original post by Ironside

I personally believe that the massively multiplayer tecnology shift presents a potential paradigm shift in how games are made and played.



MMP's have one huge problem for me and many players I know: other people.

No MMP that I know of can get away from the "Butthead factor" the way a single player game can. You can't get the same guarantee of experience the way you can with a single player game. Some people will hack. Some will cheat. Some will be offensive and rude. Some will be completely out of character and intentionally disruptive. MMPs __CAN NOT__ prevent these people from playing, and it is a fundamental drawback as well as being an advantage.

Even if you have other people, I do not see you able to implement deep, complex game experiences because you have to keep many people occupied. I'll cite the multiplayer problems of empire games like Alpha Centuari or Master of Orion: A long, enjoyable game that's a drag to play multiplayer.

MMP definitely will have it's adherents and advantages SP lacks, but in the end it'll be no more than a matter of taste. When you and you're buds are slaying kobolds in photorealistic real-time 3D with home fiber optic connections, I'll still be forming Machiavellian plots to take over the world in my single player god games (if only to keep away from the Buttheads with l88t skillz).

--------------------
Just waiting for the mothership...

Edited by - Wavinator on October 13, 2000 7:12:06 PM

Edited by - Wavinator on October 13, 2000 7:14:35 PM
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
-Wavinator

Buttheads are the bane of MMP's and typically get everyone riled up and pissed off. But this is just the type of real interacion I was describing. Mr. Butthead finds a way to trick your buddy into dropping his sword, he runs off with it laughing all the way to the store where he sells it. Well your buddy has just had an emotional expirence, someone has just ripped him off, it's a real action with a real conciquence. It may not be the most plesent of expirences, but it's true emmersion into the enviornment.
Wavinator

Well, you and your buddy talk to some of your honorable friends and you go on a quest to find him a new sword. By one butthead a whole story has begun to form, and while it's not scripted or artistic, it is gritty and real. Something we as humans can all relate to.

As far as hacking is concerned, much progress has been made of late and games like Acherons Call have shipped with very little... or no hacks/cheats.

The one point i must conceed on though is the depth. I like you agree that Games are more then just interaction and reaction. They are a medium of expression in wich some value or moral is passed onto it's players. As of yet i have not seen this implemented well in a MMP. But that's not to say it can't be done. If and when it is, you as a player will have a most enjoyable expirence before you in wich you not only participate.. but learn.

Dan

Edited by - Ironside on October 14, 2000 3:15:57 AM
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ironside: You have described exactly the type of "real life" experience that destroys multiplayer gaming. You are forgetting the most important reason for a game''s existence: to provide fun. Forgive me if I don''t consider getting ripped off to be fun in any way, either presently or in retrospect.

In fact, knowing that there are hordes of assholes in multiplayer games is exactly the reason I don''t play them. You will find many people saying MMORPG''s are all the rave, that you can do anything with anyone. These are the people who haven''t had to deal with other players yet.

I propose an addendum to whomever posted the original message that brought massively-multiplayer games into this topic. A multiplayer game will be fun if you only play with people you know you can trust. In the general populace of gamers, this might be about 10 percent. Among your own friends, 90 percent or higher.

I stopped playing Diablo online the same day I started just because some asshole flamebolted me to death for absolutely no reason other than to be a total prick. I hadn''t even spoken to this loser, but he apparently felt the need to make an enemy of me. On the other hand, I played Hellfire (expansion to Diablo) with my friends for about six hours straight.

(Off-topic note: anyone who has played Hellfire knows it does not have multiplayer support. Actually, it does. You just have to hack it to get it working.)

To conclude my rant, I''m saying that multiplayer is absolutely wonderful if you play it with people you trust, and absolutely baneful if you don''t. Anyone disagree?
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think there''s potential for the model of multiplayer put forth by Vampire or Neverwinter Nights with a small group of players, together by selection, with a tradional gamemaster running them as a party. The next logical extension, of course, is for central fansites for these titles to organize around metacampaigns. Instead of ladders there might be networks for gamemasters and administrators to oversee a coherent campaign with hundreds of players - each being run in a bitesized group and conforming to the campaigns accepted policies concerning In Character roleplay, setting and other house rules.

The really good multiplayer roleplaying will, however, probably remain the province of free text based MUSHes. Many require applications that demonstrate an understanding of character development and the setting. Bashing mobs isn''t part of the programme so people just into PKing and levelling for the sake of it aren''t interested in playing. These games are for gamemasters, writers and virtual actors interested in telling stories. Because these games aren''t limited by graphics, only by the creative writing ability of the participants, any manner of story can be told in whatever way the participants see fit. Of course, a valid question here is whether this is really a traditional game or more of a modern ''parlor'' game as conflict is often handled as much by OOC negotiation than sheer bashing power.

MMORPGs suck for roleplayers (people into playing an In Character role in a believeable manner). Even the so-called haught roleplayers with their faux Elizabethan accents aren''t exactly the epitome of deep roleplaying ability. It''s impossible in a setting that has no death and doesn''t reward institutional power so much as individual power. Not to mention one can''t ever hope to affect the setting in any meaningful way. You''re one of many fleas on the back of a dog. There''s no roleplaying to be had here.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Tom-
Your expirence with Diablo is a valid one. But in my opinion Diablo was one of the worst implementations of the multiplayer genre for the very reasons you mentioned. The game was so hackable it was almost like the hackers had access to the source code. That combined with the fact that the whole diablo theme seemed really popular with prepubecent 13 year olds made made multiplayer diablo really difficult to enjoy diablo on anything but a LAN or closed game on bnet. Also Diablo had no real story or character development it was more of an action isometric game then anything else. Blizzard called it an "Action RPG"... take off the "RP" and you've got it labeled correctly.

Ulitma Online was revolutionary in alot of ways, but it to failed in delivering features that were secure and not exploitable.

Acherons Call is probably one of the first stable MMRPG's that I have played. They effectively removed PKing from the game, rewarded teamplay and the game was virtually exploit proof. I had to quit playing it because it was destroying my personal life =D

Back to your expirence with being killed in Diablo. I've had simmilar expirences. Like for instance the time I was playing (Ultima Online) UO, and this bastard PK started attacking me. He wasn't that much stronger then me and it was a good fight. In the end he got a couple good swings in with his halbred, and my sword missed a few times and I ended up running for my life. During this time adrenalin was pooring through my body, just like in a real fight. (i've been in a few) And after escapinng I was physically shaking with the excitement. While this may not be fun (i thought it was), the marvel here is that a game was able to summon such an extreme reaction from me. Imagine if the feeling was extreme joy, or extreme sadness... often emotions that RPG's try to produce. The potential here is unlimited.. because it's not like a single player game where you just die, and back up to the last save and keep on trucking.

Your character in a MMRPG becomes you, his weapons, his armor, become yours. His life becomes your life. You invest 100hrs in a character equipping him with stuff and building him, your darn well not going to die and loose it. Because there's no backing up to the last save. It's real.

Edited by - Ironside on October 14, 2000 1:03:54 PM
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well, we''ve all sort of torn MMP games a new one. Does anyone have any suggestions of ways to overcome the apparent falures of MMPG/MMRPG''s today? How would you make one that was really revolutionary? Really Different.... What would YOU do?

Dan

(i''m working on a design doc for an MMP so this will be helpful for me)
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
quote:
Original post by Ironside

Well, we''ve all sort of torn MMP games a new one. Does anyone have any suggestions of ways to overcome the apparent falures of MMPG/MMRPG''s today? How would you make one that was really revolutionary? Really Different.... What would YOU do?




LF may want to move this to the design forum, but...

1) decide on your audience. This is crucial. If it''s mass market, you probably want to tell true roleplayers to stay the hell away. Don''t try to be all things to all people, you''ll only end up ticking either the pk''ers, hack & slashers, and role players off.

2) this is completely sacriligeous to say, but quit friggin'' ripping off Tolkien. Stop renaming Dark Elves and Trolls and come up with some orginality for goodness sakes! There are other settings that may well be just as interesting as medieval high fantasy... But even if you stick with MHF __AT LEAST__ come up with something new! What about MHF with an Egyptian flavor, or MHF with a Incan spin? Don''t just rename the land; come up with new races, and new baddies, and new spins to enliven that which has been done to death!

3) as an adjunct to #2, don''t pick a license. I''m not interested in seeing the world fiction of my favorite milieu being butchered by a bunch of people who don''t want to role play (so no I will not be trying out Verant''s Star Wars, whenever it ships)

4) bring in elements from other genres. RPG designers tend to think far too narrowly in terms of gameplay, and as such we get nothing but hack & slash & find the magic doodads (sorta OT). If you want to get away from this, you''re going to have to look at decisions a group / community has to make and turn that into fun gameplay.

5) plot is strategy. If you want more than hack&slash, one idea would be to give the players many things to affect in the game world, and ways to affect them. I can''t very well scheme to control all the silver mines if a) I can''t capture mines and b) the mines have no effect other than as monster spawn points. But this would require a good look at #4

... btw, this is a rant, I know, but I get frustrated at the cyclical, repetitive thinking that goes into creating MMORPG. I know it''s not a simple task, but it''s as if they''re all being created by an army of clones with life experiences so similar that the very thought of creating something slightly different is a inconceivable... *sigh*

--------------------
Just waiting for the mothership...
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You bring up an interesting point. Is it even possible to Write a plot for an MMP RPG. It''s interesting to note that when we discuss the creation of MMPRPG''s we discuss it from a design perspective. You may have hit on something, Massively Multiplayer Games Cannot have a written plot/story ?

For any good story you need conflit. Well as of yet the only conflict that MMP RPG story writers have been able to come up with that fits the medium is War. War With Hell, War With Eachother, War with just about anything and everything. Maby this is why we have so many Bastards screwing up the games, because we provide a story and backdrop that has provision for people to act that way.

I have a sinking suspision that it might be possible to weave a true story/plot with an MMRPG besides war... or not.. is this the inherent flaw of the meduim?
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The most untapped resource for a plot in an RPG is to let the players create a plot. And I don''t mean a plot revolving around killing masses of monsters either

Man this thread has gone just a little bit off-topic


"""" "'Nazrix is cool' -- Nazrix" --Darkmage --Godfree"-Nazrix" -- runemaster --and now dwarfsoft" -- dwarfsoft --pouya" -- Nazrix

""You see... I'm not crazy... you see?!? Nazrix believes me!" --Wavinator

Need help? Well, go FAQ yourself.
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Right on naz - but the reason that it hasn''t been tapped is because it is a wild medium. It is very hard to get a good story that way. (And I am down with the mindless slaughter too . Not with premeditated murder or just a brutal hacking every now and again ). It is because a player will probably choose something boring. This is why I think it needs to be branching...

-Chris Bennett of Dwarfsoft - Site:"The Philosophers' Stone of Programming Alchemy" - IOL
The future of RPGs - Thanks to all the goblins over in our little Game Design Corner niche
          
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Naz, In many ways I agree, but I still don''t think you''re right there. Divergence is NOT underused in games, it''s just rarely used right. At any rate, I completely disagree that it''s the MOST underused storytelling technique in games; things like proper characterization, foreshadowing and symbolism of any kind are really lacking. They''ve been around for much longer to, and I see a lot more use of divergence than of these techniques.

But you''re still right, it''d be nice to see it used right now and again...
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Darn, I kind of messed up when I made that statement. When I said that I was thinking of MMORPGs 'cause that's what everyone was talking about. You know how much I like divergence anyway, but I wasn't necessairly talking about regular single-player RPGs at that moment. I meant that in MMORPGs they should let the players tell stories by interacting w/ each other instead of creating a real plot which is what Ironside was mentioning.

As far as single-player RPGs, I think I basically agree w/ you LF. It is misused. There's potential for divergence that hasn't been exploited & really needs to be.

Anyway, LF, when you mentioned the part about the player not making a concious choice when the plot diverges...did you mean you think it should be that way for all RPGs, or your specific example?

That's really been bugging me


"""" "'Nazrix is cool' -- Nazrix" --Darkmage --Godfree"-Nazrix" -- runemaster --and now dwarfsoft" -- dwarfsoft --pouya" -- Nazrix

""You see... I'm not crazy... you see?!? Nazrix believes me!" --Wavinator

Need help? Well, go FAQ yourself.



Edited by - Nazrix on October 14, 2000 6:29:54 PM
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
"I get the sense that it will still feel something like Fallout. Sure, there''s a story there, kindof, but nothing you can get terribly involved in because we throw characterization to the wind by letting the player choose things arbitrarily."

Characterization of who? The people that the player meets, why do you think that this is so? I think that we can characterize them and their reactions quite well. & The player characterises themselves.

-->
SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER Fallout 2

Fallout 2''s strength (IMO) was that it there were times when I thought back to all the people I had met either good and trying to eke a living, evil subjugators etc. And you thought that they deserved to live




SPOILER END SPOILER END SPOILER END.



0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I certainly suppose that it applies to MMO, but then again, my whole design structure kindof falls apart that that point. That''s not a weakness at all, because MMO games are just a completely different animal, and part of the reason that they suck right now is because designers refuse to realize that.

For example: Murder-based leveling structures should have been the first thing to go in graphical MMORPGs, but the designers were too short-sighted to realize they weren''t just making an RPG with multiple players. And most of the new design that''s been done so far is just compensation for this initial mistake.

Anyway, when I wrote out the ten commandments of game design at landfish.com, I wanted it so you could apply it to pretty much any divergent media. Most of those commandments are OLD, way older than me. And I didn''t imagine a single one, I only ripped them off from other places. So I hope you might be able to get something outof applying them to MMO, although ones like MEANINGFUL turn slightly grey, now don''t they?

======
"The unexamined life is not worth living."
-Socrates

"Question everything. Especially Landfish."
-Matt
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
and why should they think anything's wrong...they're making a crap-load of money the way it is...

of course, they're all going to Gamedev Hell in the end.



"""" "'Nazrix is cool' -- Nazrix" --Darkmage --Godfree"-Nazrix" -- runemaster --and now dwarfsoft" -- dwarfsoft --pouya --nes8bit" -- Nazrix

""You see... I'm not crazy... you see?!? Nazrix believes me!" --Wavinator

Need help? Well, go FAQ yourself.


Edited by - Nazrix on October 14, 2000 8:24:46 PM
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MMORPG''s will be capable of sustaining player-run plots when someone comes up w/ the bright idea to design one with this purpose in mind. Some ways you could do this:

  • Strengthen the sense of community in your world. Let people own things. Set up sysop-run guilds to supplement player-run guilds. Only accept submissions for guildhalls from legitimate guilds w/ a distinct in-game purpose. Let people build their own houses, and give sysops the right to declare a design unfit if it doesn''t jive well w/ the atmosphere. Players will bitch that they paid, so they can do what they want, but you pay to get into a movie theatre, too, and you don''t have the right to ruin other people''s experience.
  • Plant plot instigators in your world. By this I mean hire good role-players, (I don''t think you''d have to pay them much to play their favorite game part-time ) or offer free or discounted service to people willing to play a good role well. (I don''t think you''d be at a loss for recruits here either) Let these people play dragons, demi-gods, or other strong roles prone to abuse by irresponsible players.

    The reason this would work is that people are surprisingly willing to go along with a plot-line, just can''t be bothered to come up w/ one themselves. I hate to say it, but people are sheep, for the most part. I''ve done some "independant research" on a few MUDs, and I''ve found that people will go along w/ just about anything resembling a plot, now matter how strange, silly, or contrived it is. Seriously, try this some time if you haven''t; its great fun.

  • Give people something else to do. Really work this into your interface. People need a graphical emote system in a graphical MMORPG. I''m thinking something like a body language selection menu/wheel. Work the missions into the theme of your world. Obviously w/ so many players, not every player is going to be involved in every key plot-point, but the missions should relate to the grand epic in some way, even if it is some lame "delivery-boy quest".

    LF- Need a place to stay? You see, there''s this club. . .


    If you see the Buddha on the road, Kill Him. -apocryphal
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
hehe. AP., you''re missing something.

YES, they have to give players something else to do. Many games already have. But if you leave Murder-based Experience in place with a leveling system, no one will do anything else unless you reward them more for that.

Seriously. Stick a rat in a cage, with a button that produces cheese. Never expect that rat to do anything but push that button as long as the cheese keeps coming. Put a wheel in the cage, and he might run on it every so often, but he sure as hell won''t run if he''s hungry, he''ll be eating cheese!

If you want players doing something else, either remove the psychological reward system from combat, or add a more rewarding one to something else. Basic Behavioral Psychology has never applied anywhere so much as in graphical MMORPG...
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
LF,
very true. I liked your ideas on MMO. Most of your ideas I respect, but the MMO ones I really agreed the most w/.

You could have it so the cheese is far removed from combat, and combat could potentially have such a negative affect that it would rarely be seen as a solution. When it is it would be quite an incredible situation.


"""" "'Nazrix is cool' -- Nazrix" --Darkmage --Godfree"-Nazrix" -- runemaster --and now dwarfsoft" -- dwarfsoft --pouya --nes8bit" -- Nazrix

"If your parents didn't explain this one, I'm not going to." --Felisandria




Need help? Well, go FAQ yourself.
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.